SynfarAI in surveying: suggestions, not conclusions
What an AI assistant should be allowed to do in a profession where the responsible surveyor stands behind the assessment, and what it must never do.
AIBy Synfar1 min read
AI can save a lot of time in surveying: summarizing documents, finding gaps, proposing wording. But the profession has a line that does not move because the tools get better. You are the one who stands behind the assessment.
Who may do what
In Synfar, that line is written down as rules, not good intentions. Some actions are allowed, some require you to approve exactly what is proposed, and some are reserved for people.
| Action | Rule |
|---|---|
| Read selected material in the assignment | Allowed |
| Summarize, extract and propose questions | Allowed |
| Draft findings or sections | Allowed |
| Change text you have written | Needs your approval |
| Send a message or share material | Needs your approval |
| Resolve a conflict between sources | People only |
| Set a condition grade or approve an assessment | People only |
| Issue, withdraw or replace a report | People only |
| Verify that a defect is closed | People only |
Suggestions are shown as a difference
When the assistant proposes text, you see the difference against what you wrote, with a reason and a source. You can use the suggestion, edit it or reject it, and the original is kept.
Asking again does not make it firmer
One test we care about: if someone asks for a more certain causal explanation without new evidence, the answer should be the same. Uncertainty, negation and units must be preserved, not smoothed away.
No moisture reading or observation supports a leak as the cause. I can suggest: “A possible cause has not been established and needs further investigation.”
What we measure
We do not measure how much text gets generated. We look at time saved after review and correction, and at whether the conclusions in a report have usable sources. Those are the numbers that matter to a surveyor.